Talk:Ghawar
Page should be moved to "Ghawar" seeing as it's not the only Ghawar around. Master Sima Yi 13:00, November 8, 2009 (UTC) Where does the name come from?--Oreo Biskuit!!Eleven 20:09, May 21, 2010 (UTC) single engine design It looks useful but this design is valid because it has a large tail mounted engine alo a jet engine of that size would generate a lot of thrust also in the GTA universe< things are different like gravity ie GTA IV swing glitch so a trijet or trinjet design wouldn't be needed. --Owen1983 (talk) 01:41, November 27, 2013 (UTC) Is it really manufactured by Buckingham? In this article and in the Buckingham page we can see that the Ghawar is manufactured by Buckingham,okay,it shares a very similar design and some elements,but is it officially manufactured by Buckingham? Where's the proof? :Not really. I've removed the manufacturer from the page for now. The plane has no manufacturer badging, police scanner files (can't even be controlled) or any other type of official confirmation from R*. There is no proof of it being manufactured by Buckingham at the moment. 21:07, August 28, 2014 (UTC) :::I would believe if there was a "B" logo on the plane or anything like that, same with the Jet, i believe it is manufactured by Western Company, but there is no real evidence, i will mute the SFX and gain a wanted level to check if the police will say "Suspect seen in a Western Jet" then i'll say anything here, but as far as i don't know, this is just speculation (AndreEagle17 (talk) 21:13, August 28, 2014 (UTC)) :::I think removing Buckingham is a good idea becuse its not pilotable so we cant prove it is a buckingham besides all we know it is called Ghawer it may be speculation whether the plane is a western brand i think we should leave the branding to the GTA myths wiki an stick with what we know I will Youtube it and see if i can find something. Owen1983 (talk) 21:30, August 28, 2014 (UTC) :::Its likely that when Rockstar did the mission Departure Time they wanted a Generic Private Jet and neing it was made for mission and it was intended as a prop which could not be flown they didn't Brand it. --Owen1983 (talk) 22:08, August 28, 2014 (UTC) ::: :::(Late reply) Like others said, no conclusive hints that it is a Buckingham vehicle, even with the Ghawar being a Global Express and Buckingham is based on Bombardier..... unless R* officially releases it as a pilotable vehicle made by the manufacturer (if ever). :::TransportFan2014 (talk) 09:40, November 25, 2018 (UTC) ::: I don't see anything indicating a S-duct in the Ghawar.... The article states that the Ghawar's engine configuration on the tail resembles that on a DC-10 a L-1011. But, I don't see anything relating to an S-Duct (which the L-1011 has but not the DC-10). Maybe the S-Duct thing is negligible and the article only focuses on the position? An explanation will be useful and helpful regarding this- there is a reason the article mentions that the Ghawar has a connection to the L-1011 and DC-10, but I can hardly see why (for the L-1011). TransportFan2014 (talk) 09:37, November 25, 2018 (UTC)TransportFan2014 :It is pretty clear that the statement refers only to the placement of the engine, not its specific engine type. Smurfy: illuminate - communicate - 09:53, November 25, 2018 (UTC) ::I was not refering to the type though, just that I was confused due to the location. Turns out the article just states generally where it is (at the tail) and not the specific position (etc: above fuselage). Turns out that is the case it seems. Thanks. ::Seems like I need to know how to determine wether an article is mentioning something in general, or going to the details. ::TransportFan2014 (talk) 10:03, November 25, 2018 (UTC) :::Or just read an article carefully. We aren't here to teach you basic English grammar. Monk ( Bureaucrat) Talk 14:52, November 25, 2018 (UTC)